Yes, I see the potential for amusement--and embarrassment. We must surely be on our guard lest our meager maths be not sufficient to the task. Not to worry, when it's my turn in the tank, I feel certain you'll be laughing with me rather than at me.

There are two types of people in this world: Those who can extrapolate from incomplete data

At least knowing that it adds up to a marathon means that you can still remember what you are doing by the end of the day - wouldnt want to have rowed something else by mistake, (and yes I have had to redo challenges because I remembered them wrongly).

Anyway I might be slow but no argument at precision of the outcome 12:10.5, 12:10.5 and 12:10.4 - all 2:09.8 pace. Clearly I was watching predicted time! This might be a little faster than I could row the distance 8439m but not much, but it felt tough enough.

Two Pudding Kid wrote:At least knowing that it adds up to a marathon means that you can still remember what you are doing by the end of the day - wouldnt want to have rowed something else by mistake, (and yes I have had to redo challenges because I remembered them wrongly).
Anyway I might be slow but no argument at precision of the outcome 12:10.5, 12:10.5 and 12:10.4 - all 2:09.8 pace. Clearly I was watching predicted time! This might be a little faster than I could row the distance 8439m but not much, but it felt tough enough.

It is really nice to see you here Susan - hope all is well and looks like good piece.

Two Pudding Kid wrote:At least knowing that it adds up to a marathon means that you can still remember what you are doing by the end of the day - wouldnt want to have rowed something else by mistake, (and yes I have had to redo challenges because I remembered them wrongly).

Anyway I might be slow but no argument at precision of the outcome 12:10.5, 12:10.5 and 12:10.4 - all 2:09.8 pace. Clearly I was watching predicted time! This might be a little faster than I could row the distance 8439m but not much, but it felt tough enough.

I can't access my PMs on the ISS forum so have no record of what The Sprint Group has chosen for the August CTC. From memory, it's 500, 400, 300, 200, 100 but with the twist that it's the average of the splits from each effort that counts. That is, the 100m is as important as the 500m in scoring. You may remember, or have noted, something more precise.

If any Sprint Group member can chip in here, or if there is a contact email, it would help to get round the problem of the very sick (terminally?) ISS forum.